Fadime Bayrı BİNGÖL, Meltem DEMİRGÖZ BAL, Ayşe KARAKOÇ, Begüm ASLAN

Ebelik Öğrencilerinin Doğum Simülasyon Eğitimi Deneyimleri

Amaç: Bu çalışma, ebelik bölümünde simülasyon eğitimi sonrasında öğrencilerin deneyimlerini değerlendirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Hastalar ve Yöntem: Yarı yapılandırılmış bireysel görüşmelere dayalı niteliksel tanımlayıcı fenomenolojik bir araştırmadır. Marmara Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi Ebelik Bölümünde yapılmıştır. Doğum dersi alan 65 öğrenciye, 14 hafta boyunca verilen normal doğum simülasyon uygulamasının değerlendirmesi hedeflenerek, araştırma örneklemi yüz yüze bireysel derinlemesine görüşmeyi kabul eden 19 ebelik öğrencisidir. Bulgular: Katılımcının yaş ortalaması 20,94±1,26 Min: 20, Maks: 25 ve hepsi bekardır. Yapılan görüşmelerden tematik içerik analizine dayanarak, öğrencilerin deneyimleri üç kategoride kümelenmiştir: simülasyon öncesi, simülasyon ve simülasyon çekinceleri. Bu kategorilerden çeşitli temalar ortaya çıkmıştır. Her bir kategorideki temalar yapısal, emotional-cognitive ve fiziksel olmak üzere gruplandırılmıştır. Sonuç: Simülasyon eğitimi ebelik öğrencilerinin öğrenmesinde etkilidir ve pek çok avantajı vardır. Simülasyon eğitiminde öğrencilerin el becerilerinin geliştiği belirlenmiştir. Simülasyon eğitiminde öğrencilerin mesleki aidiyet duygularının güçlendiği belirlenmiştir. Simülasyon eğitiminde öğrencilerin özgüvenlerinin arttığı belirlenmiştir. Simülatörün iyi ıkınması vb gerçeğe uygunluğu konusunda çekinceler vardır. Simülasyon eğitimi sonrasından öğrencilerimizden gelen geri bildirimlerin çoğunlukla pozitif yöndedir. Simülasyon ayrıca profesyonel ebe kimliğini alabilmelerinde destekleyici rol üstlenmektedir

The Effects of Birth Simulation Education/training In Midwifery Students

Objectives: This study was conducted to evaluate the experiences of the students after simulation education in midwifery department. Patients and Methods: It is a qualitative descriptive phenomenological study based on semi-structured interviews. It was conducted at Marmara University, Health Sciences Faculty, Midwifery Department. It is aimed to evaluate the birth simulation practice that was given for 14 weeks to 65 students who took the birth course. A total of 19 midwifery students who participated to do in-depth interviews were included in the study. Results: The average age of the participants was 20.94±1.26 years Min: 20, Max: 25 and all of them were single. The experiences of the students were clustered into three categories by using thematic content analysis of the interviews: pre-simulation, simulation and limitations on the simulation. Various sub-themes were composed of these categories. Themes in every category were grouped as structural, emotional-cognitive and physical. Conclusion: Simulation education is very effective on midwifery students’ learning and has got a lot of advantages. It was determined that students’ hand skills were improved by simulation education. In simulation education, it was determined that students’ sense of professional belonging was strengthened. It was determined that students’ selfconfidence increased in simulation education. Simulators are good but they lack real straining to conformity. The simulation education feedback from our students was mostly positive. Simulation education is also taking a supportive role for professional midwife identity/self-confidence

Keywords:

Student midwives, simulation education/training, student experience, qualitative research,

PDF

___

1. Lendahls L, Oscarsson MG. Midwifery students’ experiences of simulation-and skills training. Nurse Educ Today 2017;50:12–6. [CrossRef]

2. Vermeulen J, Beeckman K, Turcksin R, Van Winkel L, Gucciardo L, Laubach M, et al. The experiences of last-year student midwives with High-Fidelity Perinatal Simulation training: A qualitative descriptive study. Women Birth 2017;30:253–61. [CrossRef]

3. Maskálová E, Urbanová E, Bašková M, Kvaltínyová E. Experience of lecturers with simulation training in midwifery education in Slovakia. Midwifery 2018;59:1–3. [CrossRef]

4. OECD Data, Caesarean sections. Health at a Glance, 2019. https:// data.oecd.org/healthcare/caesarean-sections.htm

5. Yıldırım A, Simsek H. Qualitative Research Methods 2008. Seçkin Publishing, Ankara.

6. Bharj KK, Embo M. Factors affecting quality of midwifery students learning in the workplace: Results of two ICM congress workshops. Midwifery 2018;30;62:116–8. [CrossRef]

7. Rees CE, Crampton P, Kent F, Brown T, Hood K, Leech M, et al. Understanding students’ and clinicians’ experiences of informal interprofessional workplace learning: an Australian qualitative study. BMJ Open 2018;17:8:e021238. [CrossRef]

8. Malwela T, Maputle SM, Lebese RT. Factors affecting integration of midwifery nursing science theory with clinical practice in Vhembe District, Limpopo Province as perceived by professional midwives. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med 2016;8:a997. [CrossRef]

9. Došler AJ, Skubic M, Mivšek AP. Perception of mobbing during the study: results of a national quantitative research among Slovenian midwifery students. Coll Antropol 2014;38:1009–15. https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/268873801_Perception_of_ mobbing_during_the_study_results_of_a_national_quantitative_ research_among_Slovenian_midwifery_students

10. Ahmadi G, Shahriari M, Kohan S, Keyvanara M. Fear, an unpleasant experience among undergraduate midwifery students: A qualitative study. Nurse Educ Pract 2018;29:110–5. [CrossRef]

11. Dahlen HG, Caplice S. What Do Midwives Fear? Women and Birth 2014;27:266–70. [CrossRef]

12. Kosgeroglu N, Acat MB, Ayranci U, Ozabaci N, Erkal S. An investigation on nursing, midwifery and health care students’ learning motivation in Turkey. Nurse Educ Pract 2009;9:331–9. [CrossRef]

13. Roosevelt L, Diebel M, Zielinski RE. Achieving competency in vaginal examinations: The challenge of balancing student learning needs with best practice in maternity care. Midwifery 2018;61:39–41. [CrossRef]

14. Moyer CA, Rominski S, Nakua EK, Dzomeku VM, Agyei-Baffour P, Lori JR. Exposure to disrespectful patient care during training: Data from midwifery students at 15 midwifery schools in Ghana. Midwifery 2016;41:39–44. [CrossRef]

15. Burrowes S, Holcombe SJ, Jara D, Carter D, Smith K. Midwives’ and patients’ perspectives on disrespect and abuse during labor and delivery care in Ethiopia: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017;22;17:263. [CrossRef]

16. Bradley S, McCourt C, Rayment J, Parmar D. Disrespectful intrapartum care during facility-based delivery in sub-Saharan Africa: A qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis of women’s perceptions and experiences. Soc Sci Med 2016;169:157– 70. [CrossRef]

17. Pezaro S, Clyne W, Fulton EA. A systematic mixed-methods review of interventions, outcomes and experiences for midwives and student midwives in work-related psychological distress. Midwifery 2017;50:163–73. [CrossRef]

18. Coldridge L, Davies S. “Am I too emotional for this job?” An exploration of student midwives’ experiences of coping with traumatic events in the labour ward. Midwifery 2017;45:1–6. [CrossRef]

19. Beaumont E, Durkin M, Hollins Martin CJ, Carson J. Compassion for others, self-compassion, quality of life and mental well-being measures and their association with compassion fatigue and burnout in student midwives: A quantitative survey. Midwifery 2016;34:239–44. [CrossRef]

20. Sheen K, Slade P, Spiby H. An integrative review of the impact of indirect trauma exposure in health professionals and potential issues of salience for midwives. J Adv Nurs 2014;70:729–43. [CrossRef]

21. Mander R. Coded rhetoric: the reality of midwifery practice. Br J Midwifery 2016;24:344–52. [CrossRef]

22. Song I, Jeong HC. Nursing students’ experiences of simulation-based education on hypoglycemia. Int J Biosci Biotechnol 2015;7:147–54. [CrossRef]

23. Nitsche JF, Shumard KM, Fino NF, Denney JM, Quinn KH, Bailey JC, et al. Effectiveness of labor cervical examination simulation in medical student education. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126:13–20. [CrossRef]

24. Güneş G, Karaçam Z. The feeling of discomfort during vaginal examination, history of abuse and sexual abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder in women. J Clin Nurs 2017;26:2362–71. [CrossRef]

25. Arias T, Coxon K. An experiential model of education introduced to improve the confidence of student midwives in undertaking second stage management of the perineum (SSMP). Midwifery 2018;59:144–8. [CrossRef]

26. Ann Kirkham L. Exploring the use of high-fidelity simulation training to enhance clinical skills. Nurs Stand 2018;32:44–53. [CrossRef]

27. Granheim BM, Shaw JM, Mansah M. The use of interprofessional learning and simulation in undergraduate nursing programs to address interprofessional communication and collaboration: An integrative review of the literature. Nurse Educ Today 2018;62:118– 27. [CrossRef]

28. Catling C, Hogan R, Fox D, Cummins A, Kelly M, Sheehan A. Simulation workshops with first year midwifery students. Nurse Educ Pract 2016;17:109–15. [CrossRef]

29. Sundler AJ, Pettersson A, Berglund M. Undergraduate nursing students’ experiences when examining nursing skills in clinical simulation laboratories with high-fidelity patient simulators: a phenomenological research study. Nurse Educ Today 2015;35:1257– 61. [CrossRef]

30. Ruyak SL, Migliaccio L, Levi A, Patel S. Role development in midwifery education: A place for simulation. Midwifery 2018;59:141–3. [CrossRef]